Neo-Geo Custom Chipset...

Lately I have been reviewing the hardware used inside of each of my video game systems, from my very first Atari 2600 up to my newest the Sega Dreamcast. Among my systems are the TurboExpress, Genesis, Jaguar, Neo-Geo, SNES, etc... but I have some questions about a few of them. The Jaguar questions will not be listed here, because they're not relevant to the Neo. Neither are my TG 16, TurboExpress, and SNES questions. But my Sega Genesis and Neo questions are relevant. Both systems sport the Motorola 68000? Is that right? But the Neo has a special custom chip just for its use? And the Neo can display 4,096 colors on-screen at once and the Genesis only 64? Whats the deal here? If they both use a similar chip why is the Sega so weak? I guess my Jaguar questions are sort of relevant... is this system really 64-bit? I always thought mine was, but I never really was all that impressed by the graphics on most games, SOME were amazing, but MOST were weak. Anyhow, there appears to be a 16-bit chip in their, a 32-bit chip, and a 64-bit chip. So this system might not be a TRUE 64-bit machine? Is that wrong or what? Why do most of my Neo games look better visually than my Jag games? I really need a system genius for this one... is anybody out there qualified for these kind of questions? I hope somebody is, cause I wanna know whats up with my systems so in the future I won't get burned like I did with the Jaguar (i love my Jag, but is it really 64-bit??)
Anyway... if anybody can answer some of these questions I'd appreciate it. The Jag questions don't have to be answered, they're not relevant to the Neo, but the Genesis one is. Whats the deal? Are the Motorola 68000 Chips the same in the Neo and Genesis? Whats the custom part of the Neo's chipset? Why am I so stupid??!!?

First the Neo-Geo can display more colors because it has a more advanced Graphics Processor than the Genesis. The 68000 is the CPU not the GPU. The GPU determines the Graphical power of the system where as the CPU is just computational power.
The Jaguar was actually a 16-bit system with a 64-bit Graphics processor (I think the 32-bit processor handles sound). As for why Neo games look better that Jaguar games, that is just a matter of experience on the part of the people making the games. And while I'm on the subject, you might be interested to know that your TurboGraphx is an 8-bit system with a 16-bit graphics processor and the Dreamcast is 64-bit with 128-bit graphics ability.

Just because the CPU is 16-bit doesn't mean the Jaguar is 16-bit does it? I mean, if the graphics processor is 64-bit doesn't that make it 64-bits? What exactly is the CPU there for? (i am not too bright when it comes to electronics so forgive me) Also, why would the Jag need a 32-bit sound processor? I know its good because the Jaguar has great audio on its games. And the Dreamcast... it's a genuine 128-bit system isn't it? Same as the Jag, if the GPU is 64-bit or 128-bit isn't that what really determines the power of the system? What about the N64? What is the deal with that system's GPU and CPU? And lastly, my Turbo-Grafx 16 is only 8-bit?? What the hell? I always heard it was 16-bit, and man, let me tell ya', all of its games look better than 8-bit NES and Sega Master System games. In fact, the TG 16 easily rivals the Genesis in graphics, but ultimately the SNES wins between the 3 IMO. But Street Fighter 2 was translated to the Turbo-Grafx 16 and let me tell ya', the TG 16 version is the best and closest arcade translation of that game when compared to the Genesis and SNES versions. So how could a 8-bit system accomplish that feat? I am truly confused now. I am very naive obviously, because I always believed my Jaguar was 64-bit, my Dreamcast was 128-bit and my Turbo-Grafx was 16-bit. Is there a good website out there that will explain this to me? Or FAQ's on these systems that could help me out? Please help me out... I am very curious.

The "bit" of the processor does not necassarily denote its graphic capabilities. The Turbo Grafx sported 2 "8-bit" processors that could produce 16 graphics. The jag was basically the same way. While not true 64 bit as the N64 it could produce similiar graphics by using multiple processors. The Neo specs are unknown to me.

I always like to think that the true measure of the system's power is it's graphics processor. The CPU is normally dedicated to processing the actual program (i.e., you press a button, the character jumps) whereas the GPU is dedicated to processing the display. This is how the Turbo can have produce better graphics than the Genesis. The Genesis might have a more powerful CPU, but the GPU is lacking.
I might be wrong about the Jaguar, it's been a long time since I read about that in a magazine somewhere. I think it was in an early issue of NextGen. Some systems also have multiple CPU's or GPU's that help lessen the burden. This is how the Neo-Geo has been described to me. It has the 68000 as its main processor but it also uses a z80a (if my memory serves) and then it has the custom chipset on top of that. I think the Jaguar could have produced some amazing graphics if they would have put some time into it. At the time the only game I saw that showed what it was capable of was Rayman.

Yeah Rayman was awesome on my Jag. I believe the system is made by its games, and if the system has a GPU with tons of horsepower, chances are the games will deliver. With the Jaguar this was not the case. I do own most of the awesome Jaguar games, but thats not very many games in total. The Dreamcast is incredible, mind-blowing, total fun and games entertainment. I love my Sega Dreamcast. The Turbo-Grafx 16 was the same way for me. It had great games visually and fun-factor wise. The SNES did too. The Genesis just didn't deliver for me. I love graphics. I am into visual delights. If my eyes like it, my brain likes it, and thus my heart falls for it as well. Sound is secondary to me, but also important. I love crisp, clear, sounds. The Genesis failed to deliver there. The SNES was great. The TG-16 had cool music, but not SNES par. The Neo also had some funky music that didn't seem all that clear to me. The graphics of the Neo definitely beat out my other systems of the 16-bit era but the sound didn't. I dunno... I like visuals and audio both. The Jaguar remains a fave of mine cuz I go for the underdog a lot. Hell, I live in Dallas, Texas and bet on the Buffalo Bills in both Super Bowls against the Cowboys... so that should explain everything!

Originally posted by bstoppel:
I always like to think that the true measure of the system's power is it's graphics processor. The CPU is normally dedicated to processing the actual program (i.e., you press a button, the character jumps) whereas the GPU is dedicated to processing the display. This is how the Turbo can have produce better graphics than the Genesis. The Genesis might have a more powerful CPU, but the GPU is lacking.
I might be wrong about the Jaguar, it's been a long time since I read about that in a magazine somewhere. I think it was in an early issue of NextGen. Some systems also have multiple CPU's or GPU's that help lessen the burden. This is how the Neo-Geo has been described to me. It has the 68000 as its main processor but it also uses a z80a (if my memory serves) and then it has the custom chipset on top of that. I think the Jaguar could have produced some amazing graphics if they would have put some time into it. At the time the only game I saw that showed what it was capable of was Rayman.

Click to expand...

I have to agree with you, but the CPU determines the machine's performance. An
8-bit CPU can generate plenty of slowdown while trying to process 16-bit graphics (this was a problem for many TG-16 games). Bloody Wolf anyone?
As for the Atari Jaguar: based on my understating, Atari's 64-bit cat used dual 32-bit
processors similar to a dual CPU configured PC. Yes, custom chipsets can lesson the
processing burden from the main CPU, but systems like the TG-16 (if memory serves me
correctly) didn't have a special chipset per se. Another thing: it also depends on how much Video Ram a system has. Like a PC Video Card, the less Video Ram you have, the more it must borrow from the system's base Ram (which is usually reserved for the actual CPU), and thus it leeches memory away from other tasks (which can create slowdown and
screen/sprite flicker) making the system very inefficient.

------------------

NeoLord
Neo-News and much more!

[This message has been edited by NeoLord (edited December 23, 2000).]

The SNES did outshine Genesis graphically with 256 colors onscreen and the ability to use a 512x448 resolution, but it could slow down severely in some games, notably Magic Sword and Gradius III. Nintendo unfortunately limited their system by using a 3.58 MHz 65C816. That's the same speed as the Z80 in the Master System. If Nintendo went with a faster processor like the Genesis' 68000 @ 7.67 MHz, the system's PPU (GPU) could've been better utilized and then one could have truly said "The Super Nintendo is what Genesis'nt".

Frankly, the Genesis could've used a better GPU. In some games, the 64 color barrier led to UGLY graphics. It's a shame we didn't get a system with the Genesis' CPU and the SNES' GPU. That wouldn't be able to touch the Neo-Geo, but it would be a bit closer.

Nintendo 64 has some 3D graphics that look nice in still shots- but for some reason the frame rates often get choppy.

With the PC GeForce graphics cards, you have an AWESOME GPU- but it takes a fast processor to really milk the GPU potential. In 1990-1992, PC games were not able to touch consoles- because PCs at that time had primitive GPUs. PCs did have faster CPUs than the home consoles, but if the GPU is pathetic- the games will look like garbage no matter what the CPU speed is.

Jackal
www.gameoverdude.com

The neo carts use a massive amout of memory and thats why even today neo games look great.Jag games and others use a much smaller amount of mem and could also be part of the reason why some neo games could look better than the jag games.I also (thought not stateing) that was a part of the reason for such high cost of neo carts.But of course prduction amount and rareity would affect this also.

Are you guys sure on those Jaguar specs? To the best of my knowledge, the Jag' used four (4) 16-bit processors. I could swear this was documented on the Jag's box itself or something. The Jag' pre-dated the Playstation, Saturn and 3DO from what I remember. I believe the 3DO was the first system to use a 32-Bit CPU.

In response to the Jaguar question, the Jaguar used one 16-bit processor, not four. There was a 64-bit GPU in the system, and a 32-bit processor for sound. The system two major processors were nicknamed Tom & Jerry, and they handled the important and major tasks for the unit. The 16-bit processor was a Motorola 68000 processor and I don't know everything it was used for. I believe Tom was the graphics chip though.